ML19323D248

Forwards Request for Addl Info for Review of Recent FSAR Amends.Further Questions Are Anticipated.After Reviewing Questions,Schedule for Providing Responses Should Be Submitted

ML19323D248
Person / Time
Site:	Summer
Issue date:	05/05/1980
From:	Tedesco R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Crews E SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & GAS CO.
References
NUDOCS 8005210321
Download: ML19323D248 (7)

Text

9

/

'o, UNITED STATES

[' e i

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i

a wAsMNGToN. D. C. 20555

\\,*,...[

~

MAY 5 1980 Docket No.: 50-395 Mr. E. H. Crews, Jr.

Vice President and G;oup Executive Engineering and Construction South Carolina Electric and Gas Company P. O. Box 764 Columbia, South Carolina 29218

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THE FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FOR THE VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION As a result of our review of recent amendments to the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) for the Virgil C. Suniner Nuclear Station and our Oak Ridge National Laboratory ICSB reviewers' assessment cf selected BOP qualifica-tion data packages submitted by you, we find J!at we need additional infermation to complete our review. Enclosure 1 cnntains requests for information and positions which covers the area F mitrumentation and Control. We anticipate that additional question; ? J be forthcoming as.,

the review continues. After you have reviewed the requests, we request that you provide us with your schedule for providing responses.

Sincerely, kuh'!Ilb Robert L. Tedesco Assistant Director for Licensing Division of Licensing

Enclosures:

As stated cc: See next page t

80 0521032l A

1 Mr. E. H. Crews, Jr., Vice President and Group Executive - Engineering and Construction

~

South Carolina Electric & Gas Company P. O. Box 764 Columbia, South Carolina 29218 cc: Mr. H. T. Babb General Manager - Nuclear Operations and System Planning Scuth Carolina Electric & Gas Ccmpany P. O. Box 764 Columbia, South Carolina 29218 G. H. Fischer, Esq.

Vice President & Group Executive South Carolina Electric & Gas Company P. O. Box 764 Columbia, South Carolina 29218 Mr. William C. Mescher President & Chief Executive Officer South Carolina Public Service Authority 223 North Live Oak Drive Moncks Corner, South Carolina 29461 4

Mr. William A. Williams, Jr.

Vice President South Carolina Public Service Authority 223 North Live Oak Drive Moncks Corner, South Carolina 29461 Wallace S. Murphy, Esq.

General Counsel South Carolina Public Service Authority 223 North Live Oak Drive Moncks Corner, South Carolina 29461 Troy B. Conner, Jr., Esq.

Conner, Moore & Corber 1747 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W.

Washington, D. C.

20C06 Mr. Mark 3. Whitaker, Jr.

Manager, Nuclear Licensing South Carolina Electric & Gas Company P. O. Box 764 Columbia, South Carolina 29218 Mr. O. W. Oixon Grcup Manager, Preduction Engineering e

South Carolina Electric & Gas Company P. O. Box 764 Columbia, South Carolina 29218, 5

e

.o

{

Mr. E. H. Crews, Jr.

cc: Mr. Brett Allen Bursey Route 1 Box 93C Little Mountain, South Carolina 29076 Resident Inspector /Sumer Power Station i

c/o U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission l

P. O. Sex 1047 Irmo, South Carolina 29063 i

l 1

f I

i L

o 1

l

.l l

s s

j 3

1

• =

i t'

• O'

- l l,

4 t

!l i

i 4

S m.-.

w ENCLOSURE 1 J

031.0 INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROL

\\.

.m

... J.-

The following questions have been prepared based on review of enviranmental and seismic equip =ent qualification plans provided by the applicant identified as D. G. O'3rien Co. Qualification plan No. DC0 Report No. ER-268, Rev. A, May 24, 1979, prototype Test Report and Fin.11 Safety Analysis Report,

.y.

FSAR Sect. 3.11, amendment to and including amendment Ne. 15, dated Sept. 1979.

l9;

\\,

=,.

031.62 In the final Safety Analysis Report Sect. 3.11 on p" age 3.11-8h, -

3.(s paragraph b (2), number of years of service life was omitted.

Provide the number to be inserted in the phrase, at the end of 7."

years service life.

031.63 Identify the curves in the FSAR Sect. 3.11, Fig. 3.11-11 with and without the effect of' shielding.

Ni-031.64 In the FSAR Sect. 3.11 on page 3.ll-8C., Par. 2a(1), infers's test plan by analysis of material tests. for Fire Resistance.

It is not

~

evident that Fire Resistance testing has been performed, and that test results have been supplied. Please provide the fire resistance test results on this penetration asse=bly 'in accordance with IEEE 383-1974, Section 2.5.

031.65 verify, by submitting test results, that polysulfone insulation material used in plus redesign has a qualified ser' ice life.of 40 years and will continue to perform its safety related function during and af ter a main steam line break or loss of coolant accident.

Reference DC0 Report ER-268, Rev A, 5/24/79, Par.1.4 (4).

031.66 Referenca is made to plug designs that were subjected to >$3 and

' !E LOCA environments as shown in Figur'es 3.1 through 3.4.

Since this

'O information was not supplied, please provide. Justify the omission -

of thermally aging these designs to 40 year service life prior to MSB and LCCA test $ng. Ref. 26 DGO ER-268 Rev. A 5/24/79, Sect. 3.4.

031.67 The test unit consisted of a penetration assembly similar to that This i'for-ation shown in Reference 2.4 DC0 Inc. Drawing R31E3029CXX.

n was not supplied. Please provide copy of referenced drawing.

Reference DC0 ER268, Rev. A, S/24/79, Par. 3.3.

s G

e

,m--

~,

,w

u 2_

s 031.68 Provide the details of method used to prevent moisture' peiMration into the module conductor insulation at the plug /modul'E interface by supplying Referenced Fig. 5.1 (not included in Dco-ER-268).

This may have contributed to the low level faults during testing.

Ref. DCO-ER-268, Rev. A, S/24/79, Par. 5.2.1.

v A t' 031.69 verify that the methods utilized to prevent environmental seal

~

failure at the interface connections inside containment, between the electrical penetration assembly contacts and the connecting J.-

vire, cable and seals, will not cause los,s of power or loss of

~

signals that will prevent safety related equipment frors performing its safety related functi5n before, during, and af ter a MSS or LOCA, and after the assembly has been aged to its 40 service life.

g

~

9

~

en 9

s-s r-

?

J O

8

i l

1

.u ENCLOSURE 2 i

J

\\

The following questions have been prepared based on review of environnental and seismic equipment qualification plans provided by the applicanc. Ldentified as The Karite Co., Qualification Test of Kerite, 600 Volt HT Power Cable Under Simulated Post Accident Conditions, December 11, 1975.

~

' ' 'I -

031.70 It is not apparent that the 600 vole Power Cable identified in FSAR 3.ll-Ca (p 3.11-52) as Kerite Type !!R-FR is the ss=e type cable that

.[.

was tested in the LOCA/MSL3 kerite Report of December 11, '1975.

The

.0.:.4p; qualification. test report identifies the cable type as Kerite HT.

Verify that this cable type HT is the same construction and util'i:es 1

J '//, the same materials as the, cable specified in the FSAR.

.. Justify that 100 hours0.00116 days <br />0.0278 hours <br />1.653439e-4 weeks <br />3.805e-5 months <br /> exposure at 150*C (300*F) is equivalent to 031.71' 40 years service life under normal te=perature and normal irradiation environment by submittin'g the referenced Proprietary Engineering Memorandum Kerite No.178. This memo should include the Arrhenius' data that supports this conclusion. Refe'rence: Proprietary Engineering 6

Memorandum No. 178 entitled " Determining Temperature Ratings of Cables and Preaging Requirements for LOCA' Simulation Tests" dated December 27, 1974.

If the cable is not qualified for 40 years service life under nor,al

• temperature and normal irradiation environment, provide the method and frequency of replacement of cables, splicas.,

031.72 The sample cables and splices tested for LOCA and MSL3 envirenments are required to be in aged condition, representing 40 years service life at normal temperature and normal irradiation conditions prior

~

to LOCA or MSL3 environmental conditions.

Provide the test plan, failure criteria and test results that support the conclusion that the cables and splic.es were the same ones thermslly aged and irradiated prior to LOCA and >$L3 qualification testing. Provide test da splices as a comparison.,ta for the nor-ther= ally aged cables and 031.73 It is not obvious from the test result summary supplied by the Karite Co. that the icw voltage power terminations (splices) inside

. and outside containment are being qualified for 40 years nor=al temperature and normal irradiation environment service and subsequently qualified for LOCA snd MSL3 environmental'conditicas. Kaferenca TSAR 3.11-Ca (p. 3.11-62).

e

-s,

o s.r a

+

2-If the applicant is attempting to gaalify the low vo1tage power cerninations (splices) inside and outside contain=ent.for LOCA e

andMSL3 environments,itwillbenecessarytoaccura,g. gly [ identify the types of splices utilized, the caterials utili:ed, the qualification method e= ployed, the failure criteria, and the test results to support the conclusion that these splices have a qualified life of 40 years and can perform their safety related r.

I;'.'UE..

functions after the 40 year service life when subsequently T;;,i"6.,'[ l1

- exposed to LOCA and MSL3, environments.

t;

' y, This concern has been brought about as a result of th s failure

' codes exhibited in the thermal aging, radiation exposure, LOCA/MSLB testing of low voltage electrical penetration, by

,'., ', ' D. G. O' Brien.

t O

O

• ,. /

4

~

g*

e.

9 S '

D I.

e g

e+..

g 4

i

,